Aeroad sizing, xs vs 2xs

Aeroad sizing: xs vs 2xs

Hi, I am struggling to make a decision on what size of Aeroad to get.

My height is 166.5 cm, inner leg length 75cm.
Current stack height is 655mm, reach+ is 454mm

Canyon PPS suggested me to get xs, but if I lower my height just 0.5 cm (about 0.2in) to 166 cm, PPS will suggest xs (for stability)or 2xs (for agility)

My current bike is an old 52 venge. It fits me well, but the seat height is very low. Does not look pro at all. And reach is good as now (454mm) , but I think a bit short can also be good.

I may want a shorter crank of 165mm in the 2xs (current is 170mm) but I am afraid that the reach+ is too short for me.

Anyone has idea or suggestions? Should I size down or stick with what canyon says?

I attached Canyon PPS and bike geometry comparison.

Pictures of current bike, what stem/spacers do you have on there?

Make sure you check out the stock stem length and factor that into your analysis. Canyon historically specs pretty short stems.

I had a SM Aeroroad (previous gen) at 175cm and needed to put a 120 stem on it (stock was 100, I think?). IN hindsight, I wish I had gotten the Med.

I don’t think I would drop down to the 2XS…but again, check the stem lengths.

If your stack on your current bike is actually what you stated, and thats not a typo, then the Aeroad simply is not the right bike for you… Canyon has probably the lowest stack to reach geometry of any of the big brands.

1 Like

Please see my bike picture. I don’t have a close up picture of the stem/spacer at the moment.
The stem is 100mm, -6 degree. Spacer is pretty small, around 5-10 mm as I remember? Could be wrong.

Note that I stated reach**+** here not reach.
Reach+ in here is the horizontal distance from the bb to the center of the handlebar tops which stem clamps to the bar.
You maybe right, maybe canyon is not the right brand for me.

My current stem length is 100mm

I would suggest going to to compare the bikes side-by-side.

GG is nice since you can compare more than 2 bikes at the same time. It can help with some initial whittling to narrow a field quickly. But he is already using BikeInsights that has all the same info, adds some more data and the visual overlay is super handy as well. Not everyone needs the extra stuff in BI but I like how direct the data is in the graphic but also the text data colums.


Yeah, I apparently skipped over the BikeInsights pics… :man_shrugging:t2: :man_shrugging:t2:

1 Like

Looking at the current bike, the challenge with 2XS is that you’ll (probably) need to run more spacers under the stem to get a similar stack, which (as you get higher) will reduce the reach more than starting wtih the XS and using the same spacers as the current bike.

Again, worth looking at the stem options on offer.

The Aeroad, even XS, will show a little more seatpost and as the clamp is hidden, maybe more than you think(?).

You mention “Reach+” which is a specific term I’ve not seen used. Noting that this is the effective Reach to the Stem Handlebar Clamp is great since stem’s sometimes get overlooked.

But it’s also necessary to double-check Handlebar Reach since that can vary with more new bikes having shorter values in many cases. Adding to that is the functional Hood Reach since the actual grip location relative to the Handlebar Clamp location varies between brands and even models within a given brand.

I like to measure what I call “Hood Reach” to that midpoint of the arc in the hoods. I am not aware of any log that has Hood Reach data so it is a manual research deal starting with that you have on hand, and then possibly checking active stock in your area.

Just worth looking at all that because I’ve found these issues for people who matched stuff like Frame Reach and even Stem Length only to get tripped up with hoods and bars.

ETA: My sheet that I use, based upon saddle for the Reach & Drop values (D, E, F below), but could be used to solve for X/Y values with a bit of additional math.

1 Like

Thanks for the additional input. Maybe I should just a get a proper bike fit and try the real bike in person… :joy:
but I did not have a good bike fit experience last time, as it made my knee pain came back.

Fitting and Bike / Component sizing are really two different things to a degree. I see that specifically in this case since you have a known bike, understand how it works for you and sounds like it’s basically a “good” reference.

The important thing I was stressing here is to make sure you look at ALL the distances & related components that land you in your final position on the bike.

1 Like

I didn’t say anything about your stated reach… I was more concerned with your stack figure of 655mm. I figured you were treating it as you did with your “reach+” and measuring with the stem and bars. Even the larger of the two Canyons you are deciding between has a stack of 521mm, leaving you with 130mm of stack to make up… So lets assume you get a generous 30mm from the midway point of the stem steerer clamp, 10mm from the headset bearing cover that they probably don’t include in their measurement, then a 90mm x -6d stem will gain you a further 15mm stack. You’d still be looking at +50mm of spacers under the stem…

For reference, something like the new Giant Defy in size small would get you about 30mm more seatpost exposed(comfort), and 20mm more stack to start off with. Additionally, you’re free from Canyons silly cockpit. For someone of your size, you’d almost certainly gain more watts from a 36cm handlebar than you would from an “aero” frame.

1 Like

You are basically me. I am 167cm tall, with a 76 or 77cm inseam. I ride a XS Ultimate Disc from 2018. Stem is slammed. This is the 90mm, 390mm H36 integrated handlebar.

I haven’t done a direct comparison between the new and old Ultimate and the new Aeroad, but I remember the Aeroad and Ultimate now have similar if not the same geometry for more comfort.

This is what the seat looks like, 160mm cranks:

1 Like

Thanks for the recommendation. I would need to check out the Defy in person.

This is a very good reference. 160mm crank probably help increases the seat height 10mm when compared with 170mm crank. How do you feel about 160 crank? I am thinking of going to a bike fit to see if my current 170mm is too long for me.

I’m trying to go to 155mm!

When I started cycling in 2016, I was at 170mm. I then went down to 165 and have been at 160mm for the last 1.5 years. I’d have to switch back to 170mm to really see if I feel the difference, but I like the idea of shorter cranks allowing me to be more comfortable in aero positions for longer.

I have not felt any negatives.